The World Affairs Board is the premier forum for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include military and defense developments, international terrorism, insurgency & COIN doctrine, international security and policing, weapons proliferation, and military technological development.

Our membership includes many from military, defense, academic, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?

A row over the UK’s access to the Galileo project, the European satellite global-positioning system used both for civil and military purposes, is the latest tussle about what Brexit would mean for British science and technology. For all the familiar, rhetorical huffing and puffing, the dispute is another illustration of the myriad small-print complexities that need to be resolved if the UK departs from the EU.

The government’s position, outlined in a document just released by the UK Space Agency, is that the UK wants to retain its participation in Galileo, including access to classified data from the satellite system needed for security and defence. The government says that this would be in the mutual interests of both the EU and the UK, that the proposed exclusion from “security-related discussions and exchanges to the post-2019 development of Galileo” is inconsistent with previous agreements. It stresses however that if some satisfactory arrangement can’t be reached then the UK will develop an alternative, competing system. And it will ask for a refund of Britain’s 12% contribution to the €10bn cost of Galileo.

For the EU the position seems quite clear. The UK agreed previously to restrictions on access to sensitive, secure data from Galileo for countries outside the EU, so why should it expect to become an exception? This is just another example of the “let’s just keep everything we have now” fantasy that one senior EU official recently lamented.

Needless to say, your response to this tiff will depend on your sympathies to Brexit generally: either “what on earth – or in space – did we expect?”, or “why is Brussels being so bloody-minded?” Either way, it is rather late in the day to be discovering yet another stumbling block. In a paper published in March, the House of Commons committee on science and technology expressed exasperation at the government’s dilatory attitude towards the complications of the many science-related EU programmes and agreements in which the UK has been embedded. In its Panglossian document Collaboration on science and innovation last September, the government expressed eternal optimism that all could be resolved while offering very little indication of how that might happen.

On Galileo that document said little more than, in effect: “Our people have helped develop it and we’re really good at space, so we hope you’ll let us carry on as before.” It pointed out that there are currently negotiations with Norway and the US for access to the crucial public regulated service (PRS) from Galileo, the encrypted signal designed for security activities. Indeed there are, but nothing is yet agreed.

Another point of contention is the EU’s Copernicus satellite network for monitoring of the natural environment, which will collect important data on climate change, natural disasters and ecosystems such as fish stocks. Here too the future of UK involvement is unclear – and is complicated by the fact that Copernicus is partly funded by the European Space Agency (ESA). Because ESA operates independently of the EU, the UK would remain a member after Brexit.

In short, it’s getting very messy, and the clock keeps ticking. The UK space agency, though, is in a rather bullish mood in the wake of the recent Space Industries Act, which establishes a regulatory framework for all kinds of new space initiatives including the building of launch sites on UK soil. Two sites are already planned, in Cornwall and Scotland. Private space-industry companies are springing up everywhere, and while it’s doubtful that the UK could achieve very much in space by itself, its continuing role in ESA, along with hoped-for collaborations with the US and Australia (which announced a new $26m space agency earlier this month), are helping to create the impression of a boom time for British astronautics. No wonder Tim Peake’s six-month stint on the International Space Station is being milked for all the publicity value it’s worth.

In one view, Brexit creates an opportunity to unfurl the UK’s space ambitions on a wider platform. In another, jeopardising the potential markets in Europe, at such a crucial moment, while hyping vague plans to do space deals with nations on the other side of the planet, looks insane.

And this, of course, is Brexit in microcosm, as doubtless played out also on countless other commercial and industrial stages across the sectors. Once again it seems that the only way we’ll have our cake and eat it is by baking our own.

The chancellor, Philip Hammond, has warned that the UK will build its own satellite navigation system to rival the European Union’s €10bn (£9bn) Galileo project if Brussels carries out its threat to block access.

The European commission has cited legal issues about sharing sensitive information with a non-member state to justify its decision to shut British firms out of the project. The EU has also said it will restrict access to encrypted signals from Galileo.

Speaking as he arrived in Brussels for a meeting of finance ministers on Friday, Hammond said the UK could not accept the EU’s decision to block British companies from the satellite’s manufacture and the government from secure aspects of the project.

He told reporters: “We need access to a satellite system of this kind. A plan has always been to work as a core member of the Galileo project, contributing financially and technically to the project.

“If that proves impossible then Britain will have to go it alone, possibly with other partners outside Europe and the US, to build a third competing system. But for national security strategic reasons we need access to a system and will ensure that we get it.”

The UK is said to be hopeful that Australia could be a partner for such a rival project, should the impasse with the EU continue.

The EU is insistent that the UK had agreed in 2011 as an EU member state on the rules on blocking non-EU countries from access to secure elements of the project.

A senior EU official said, after some fraught negotiations this week, that it had become clear the UK “would like to transform Galileo from a union programme to a joint EU-UK programme, and that is quite a big ask for the EU”.

“They want to have privileged access to the security elements of PRS (the encrypted navigation system for government-authorised users) and to be able to continue manufacturing the security modules which would mean that after Brexit the UK, as a third country, would have the possibility to turn off the signal for the EU,” the official said.

“It also means they are asking for information and the possibility to produce the security modules that would give them information that currently not all member states have.”

The European commission will to report back to member states to gauge their views, but the UK’s approach has been described as a “big ask”.

On Thursday, the EU accused British negotiators of “chasing a fantasy” and failing to get to grips with the consequences of Brexit. A senior EU official also claimed progress on the problem of avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland was proving elusive, something the UK government sources suggest is mere posturing by Brussels.

In a sign that the criticism has been felt, the prime minister’s chief Brexit adviser, Olly Robbins, who has been leading the talks this week, wrote a rare tweet on Friday morning.

He said: “Very proud of the x-Government team that worked so hard to support technical talks in Brussels this week. UK proposals for a deep relationship, calmly and professionally presented.”

The shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, said: “On the same day the Office for National Statistics has confirmed that UK economic growth is the weakest it’s been in six years, it’s not surprising the chancellor is looking to focus on matters in outer space.

“Working people will be rightly angry that Philip Hammond can find billions of pounds at the drop of a hat for a space programme, yet is not prepared to find the money our vital public services like the NHS desperately need.

“It’s time the chancellor came down to Earth, to prove he is on the same planet as the rest of us by recognising what he is putting people in our country through with his austerity cuts.”

The EU wants the UK to agree by a European council summit in June to present a workable backstop position for Northern Ireland that would come into force should a future trade deal or bespoke technological solutions fail to arise that could avoid the need for a hard border.

In recent days, the prime minister has suggested a solution could be found in the UK staying in the customs union for a time-limited period.

But the EU is insistent that the backstop must be “Northern Ireland-specific”. The official said: “We have to do away with the fantasy that there is an all-UK solution to that.”

Responding to the EU’s withering assessment of the UK’s approach, Hammond told reporters: “We’re having very constructive discussions. I don’t think that’s a particularly helpful comment; there are obviously a wide range of views on both sides.

“Everybody I’ve engaged with has been very constructive, very keen to find a way to move forward. We’re very conscious of the ticking clock and the need to make significant progress for the June European council and that’s what we’re here to do.”

Hammond said the government was looking at “all sorts of options to deliver the reassurances that are being sought around maintaining the Irish border in an open condition”.

He said: “That’s a priority for us. We’re very keen to find a way to move forward and we’re looking at all the options.”

The above numbers exclude those who acquire citizenship by descent or birth, i.e. those who merely formalize their already inherent citizenship status. This is mostly significant for the Irish numbers.

Source: Eurostat migr_acq, where with some patience you can dig out the citizenship acquisition rates for any country of origin in the world.

This is worrying. I had assumed that the Irish government was failing to prepare as they expected Brexit to collapse under its own stupidity, but this sounds like they may have accepted its happening now.

Irish Foreign Minister Simon Coveney was quoted as setting the deadline on Saturday.

The border between British-ruled Northern Ireland and the rest of Ireland will be Britain's only land frontier with the EU after it leaves the bloc.

Finding a practical solution is still proving elusive.

Britain must submit written proposals on how it plans to keep a frictionless border on the island of Ireland after Brexit in the next two weeks or face an uncertain summer of talks, Irish Foreign Minister Simon Coveney was quoted as saying on Saturday.

The border between British-ruled Northern Ireland and the rest of Ireland will be Britain's only land frontier with the EU after it leaves the bloc. While both sides say they are committed to keeping the border open, finding a practical solution is still proving elusive.

The EU and Dublin insist Britain's withdrawal treaty must lock in a backstop arrangement guaranteeing Northern Ireland will abide by EU regulations in case a future trade pact does not remove the need for border controls. London has signed up to this but disagrees with the EU's means of achieving it.

"In the next two weeks, we need to see written proposals. It needs to happen two weeks from the summit," Coveney told the Irish Times newspaper, referring to a June summit of EU leaders that is supposed to mark significant progress on the issue.

"If there is no progress on the backstop, we are in for an uncertain summer. At this point we need written proposals on the Irish backstop consistent with what was agreed. We await written proposals from the British side."

Under the EU proposal, if all other attempts to avoid a hard border fail, Northern Ireland would form a "common regulatory area" with the bloc, in effect keeping the British province in a customs union with the EU.

Britain has rejected this as a threat to the constitutional integrity of the UK and on Friday a government official said it was considering a proposal giving Northern Ireland joint UK and European Union status so it can trade freely with both.

However that idea, which the official said may not be put to the EU as Britain is still debating its own preferred Brexit strategy, was dismissed by officials in Dublin, Brussels and by the pro-Brexit Northern Irish party that supports Britain's minority government.

The Irish Times reported that Coveney, Prime Minister Leo Varadkar and other senior ministers including Finance Minister Paschal Donohoe have repeatedly told their British counterparts that concrete proposals are needed soon.

UK will build own satellite system if frozen out of EU's Galileo – chancellor

According to the Financial Times, the EU has outmaneuvered the UK on its Galileo threats btw.

The UK was basically threatening to use its veto in ESA on the procurement for the next batch, for which a decision is due June 13th - ESA is procuring and operating the satellites for the EU, and within the ESA Council decisions have to be unanimous. The EU maneuver is simply that the next batch of satellites will have all liabilities underwritten by the EU instead and transferred to ESA (and of course the cost deducted from what they're paying ESA). Within the EU such a simple financial decision only needs a simple majority.